Misplaced Pages

Talk:Osteopathy: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:40, 7 July 2014 editKhabboos (talk | contribs)1,384 edits →Ability to heal and repair itself← Previous edit Latest revision as of 18:07, 12 December 2024 edit undoPianoDan (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,322 edits →Semi-protected edit request on 12 December 2024: decline c 
(358 intermediate revisions by 96 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Contentious topics/talk notice|topic=cam}}
{{Talk header}} {{Talk header}}
{{FailedGA|10:24, 25 May 2017 (UTC)|topic=Biology and medicine|page=1}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject Skepticism|class=C|importance=mid|attention=yes}} {{WikiProject Skepticism|importance=mid|attention=}}
{{WikiProject Medicine |class=C |importance=Low}} {{WikiProject Alternative medicine}}
{{WikiProject Alternative medicine |class=C |importance=High}} {{WikiProject Alternative Views|importance=Low}}
}} }}
{{Connected contributor|User1=OA2020|U1-EH=yes|U1-declared=yes|U1-otherlinks=]}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
|maxarchivesize = 70K |maxarchivesize = 70K
|counter = 2 |counter = 4
|minthreadsleft = 7 |minthreadsleft = 7
|algo = old(90d) |algo = old(90d)
|archive = Talk:Osteopathy/Archive %(counter)d |archive = Talk:Osteopathy/Archive %(counter)d
}} }}
{{Broken anchors|links=
{{archives|bot=MiszaBot I|age=90}}
* <nowiki>]</nowiki> The anchor (#Levels of evidence) has been ] before. <!-- {"title":"Levels of evidence","appear":{"revid":624547614,"parentid":624030759,"timestamp":"2014-09-07T15:17:27Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"disappear":{"revid":632727569,"parentid":632727383,"timestamp":"2014-11-06T19:14:45Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":}} -->
}}
{{Backwards copy
| title = L’ostéopathie
| year = 2021
| url = https://kinekleber.com/en/losteopathie/
| org = Kiné Kléber
| monthday = 2 July
}}

== Nomenclature ==

The sentence in the lead, "People practicing osteopathy are referred to as osteopathic practitioners" is inaccurate and contradicts two of the cited sources (the link to the third source appears to be dead). Non-physician, manipulation-only practitioners of osteopathy are referred to as osteopaths. Doctors of Osteopathic Medicine are referred to as osteopathic physicians. This is stated in the sources as well as the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine's website (http://www.aacom.org/become-a-doctor/about-om/US-vs-abroad). Both call themselves "DO's". In the United States, osteopaths are prohibited from referring to themselves as "DO's" to avoid being confused with osteopathic physicians.] (])

{{Talk:Osteopathy/GA1}}

⚫ == Canada ==


it says it's not government regulated, then it says you need to register in private schools. If it's not regulated, you don't need any education, and could just teach yourself or make it up as you go... ] (]) 20:19, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
== Opening ==


== Training requirements ==
Suggest we change:
"Osteopathy is a philosophy and an alternative medical practice which emphasizes the interrelationship between structure and function of the body and recognizes the body's ability to heal itself; it is the role of the osteopath to facilitate that process, principally by the practice of manual and manipulative therapy"
into:
"Osteopathy is a philosophy and an alternative medical practice which assumes an interrelationship between structure and function of the body and an ability of the body to heal itself. The osteopath is thought to facilitate that healing process, principally by the practice of manual and manipulative therapy"
or something simular. ] (]) 13:35, 7 January 2013 (UTC)


Died of breast cancer, recently. And I learned she spent her time seeing an Osteopath, and the Article doesn't have prominently displayed something like REQUIRED EDUCATION. How much education does it take for some random quack to call himself "doctor"? A two-year degree? A course by mail from a matchbook cover? A certificate from some university in Belize? What's the difference in education between a medical doctor and this form of quack?] (]) 02:49, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
:The addition of the words "assumes" and "is thought" weaken the description, IMO. The purpose of the lead is to define the topic. The first description does that. The second introduces a skeptical ] which I don't think belongs in the lead. ] (]) 20:22, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
:Per ], I changed the section header, from "Quack Medicine and a Dead Friend". The issue of more content on education requirements is a reasonable one, so I wanted to leave that here. --] (]) 18:28, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
: This is the wrong article. Here are the proper articles: ] and ]. -- ] (]) (''''']''''') 18:39, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
::But I wonder whether it would be useful ''here'' to have anything more about ''the lack'' of training requirements? --] (]) 18:45, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
::: The "criticism" section deals with some of the problems. The issue is when certain methods are used for conditions where modern medicine is more appropriate. For example, OMT / HVLA manipulation is not an appropriate treatment for allergies and asthma. It may have some limited legitimacy for certain musculoskeletal complaints of a purely mechanical nature. Note that "limited"!! Modern DOs recognize this, and that's why very few of them continue to use OMT at all. They have learned of its limitations and the superior results from modern medicine. Some osteopaths still "over" depend on OMT, and we rightly call them quacks. -- ] (]) (''''']''''') 00:43, 27 May 2024 (UTC)


== False information on osteopathy ==
: I'm not sure if the suggestion by the IP editor is quite accurate. Nobody is disputing that there is an "interrelationship between structure and function of the body", it's just that the text make it sound like the osteopaths understand something about that interrelationship that the knowledge-based medicine does not. ] ] 13:42, 26 March 2013 (UTC)


Please update with current information about American Osteopathic Medicine which is becoming quite widespread and mainstream in modern medicine. Most American osteopaths practice in primary care positions such as family and internal medicine directly alongside and in practices with allopaths equally. One in 4 medical school graduates are osteopathic physicians. Here is more information from the American osteopathic association.
::Right -- also, the implication that "facilitation of the healing process" via "manual and manipulative therapy" is supported by some sort of neutral, double-blinded study data, which to my knowledge it is not. ]&nbsp;]/] 17:01, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
https://osteopathic.org/what-is-osteopathic-medicine/ ] (]) 19:01, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
::: I changed it to "Osteopaths ''claim to'' facilitate the healing process", hopefully it reflects the state of affairs more accurately. ] ] 17:41, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
:Already covered at ]. --] (]) 20:47, 30 July 2024 (UTC)


== Regulation and legal status ==
Just a quick comment on something that I think needs ammending -The Maidstone School is fully accredited and trains registered (GOsC) practitioners. I am at a loss as to why the article says the school has lost it's GOsc accreditation.
Thanks. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 14:45, 3 April 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


Current article:
:That whole sentence (the last one in the ] subsection) seems unnecessary and a bit judgmental to me - not to mention completely unsourced; perhaps we should just remove it entirely? ]&nbsp;]/] 15:42, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
New Zealand
:: The entire section is unsourced and poorly written. Whatever you do to it you can only make it better. ] ] 15:05, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
In New Zealand a course is offered at the Unitec Institute of Technology (Unitec). Australasian courses consist of a bachelor's degree in clinical science (osteopathy) followed by a master's degree. The Unitec double degree programme is the OCNZ prescribed qualification for registration in the scope of practice: Australian qualifications accredited by the Australian and New Zealand Osteopathic Council are also prescribed qualifications.


Correction:
:::I'll take out that last sentence (which is potentially libelous besides), and I'll have a go at rewriting the rest if I can find any ] to cite on it. ]&nbsp;]/] 17:02, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
In New Zealand a course is offered at ]. The Bachelor of Musculoskeletal Health https://www.ara.ac.nz/products/programme/ch4063-stru-bachelor-of-musculoskeletal-health/) and the Postgraduate Diploma in Osteopathy (https://www.ara.ac.nz/products/programme/ch4064-stru-postgraduate-diploma-in-osteopathy/) programmes is the OCNZ prescribed qualification for registration in the scope of practice: Australian qualifications accredited by the Australian and New Zealand Osteopathic Council are also prescribed qualifications.


Osteopaths are health practitioners working under the ] (https://www.health.govt.nz/regulation-legislation/health-practitioners/responsible-authorities). Osteopaths are ] providers (https://www.acc.co.nz/im-injured/what-we-cover/treatment-we-pay-for).
⚫ == Lead ==
Osteopaths New Zealand (ONZ) https://osteopathsnz.co.nz/ represents osteopaths in New Zealand. ONZ is a member of Allied Health Aotearoa New Zealand (https://www.alliedhealth.org.nz/). ] (]) 19:34, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
:Does your proposed change really belong on ''this'' page, or at ]? --] (]) 19:38, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
:: Good question. I would think the latter. -- ] (]) (PING me) 22:52, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
:::When will the article be corrected please? ] (]) 05:08, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
:::: You need to respond to the comments above. Have you looked at the other article? We have TWO very different articles on the topic of osteopathy. Are you in the right place? -- ] (]) (PING me) 15:16, 27 October 2024 (UTC)


== This article is completely inaccurate and is misleading. ==
The lead of this article is not very clear. It is overly complex, poorly worded, and fails to provide the reader with a good summary of the article's subject. Other editors have noted the problems in the lead. One example is the sentence below. I am going to work on it. If anyone has constructive ideas, please share.
:"The American Osteopathic Association recommends using the terms osteopathic physician and osteopathic medicine to distinguish individuals trained in osteopathic medicine in the United States who have attained the degree of Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine (D.O.), a degree equivalent, though different in certain aspects, to that of Doctor of Medicine (M.D.), who practice the full scope of medicine and receive additional training in osteopathic manipulative medicine from individuals described as osteopaths who use osteopathy, the restricted-scope form of practice outside of North America."
:] (]) 02:01, 20 April 2013 (UTC)


This page states that Osteopathy is a pseudoscience and is an alternative medicine, implying that there is not scientific credibility or validity in OMM as a treatment model. The citation that is used is the 4th citation from Quackwatch that when clicking on the link brings the user to a page that defines "quackery" and does not provide any scientific information proving that Osteopathy is a pseudoscience. This article then goes on to state, "An osteopathic physician in the United States is a physician trained in the full scope of medical practice, with a degree of Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine (DO)." It seems dubious to claim that OMM is a pseudoscience but then to acknowledge that Doctors of Osteopathic medicine have been conferred all of the rights, privileges, and responsibilities to that of a Doctor of Allopathy, MD.
:If you can make that make sense, that would be much appreciated. --] (] · ] · ]) 02:26, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
It defies all science and reason to believe that the manipulation of ones joints and muscles does not aid in the restoration of their normal function.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9143587/ ] (]) 17:12, 10 November 2024 (UTC)


:] is a different topic. They are pretty much normal doctors but with a bit of embarrassing quackery (i.e. osteopathy) mixed in with their training, largely for historical reasons. Meanwhile in many countries "osteopaths" (who anyone can be on their own say-so) are quintessential quacks at large. ] (]) 17:18, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
: I think the lead looks much better now. It can howver be streamlined further. For example, WOHO does not seem to be important enough to be mentioned in the lead. How about moving that paragraph somehere further down the article? ] ] 11:27, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
::Osteopaths aren’t self-identifying it’s a title. ] (]) 10:25, 12 December 2024 (UTC)


== Semi-protected edit request on 12 December 2024 ==
== legit science ==


{{edit semi-protected|Osteopathy|answered=yes}}
medical science shows not only a cause/effect relationship, but the mechanism of this relationship - at least, as is possible. it's not always possible. cip - adhd, and symptom improvement caused by stimulant meds like ritalin & adderal. in this and many other cases, cause/effect is vague. however, take immunization, where dead viral material is identified as foreign by the immune system, which eventually makes anti-bodies to prevent a harmful infection by this virus. this mechanism is understood in great detail. many others are known/documented to various degrees. are there any that can be shown for osteopathy? inclusion of these would make the article more informative, less vague, and for many of us, more convincing. ] (]) 01:58, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Remove the word “pseudoscience / pseudoscientific” from the description of osteopathy as this is not accurate. In the UK osteopathy is an Allied Health Profession (not an alternative / complementary profession) based on a bio-psycho—social model of health and illness and is evidence based as outlined in its regulatory guidelines. All osteopaths have a masters level degree focused on diagnosing and treating musculoskeletal issues. Claims of pseudoscience are outdated. ] (]) 10:24, 12 December 2024 (UTC)


] '''Not done for now''': please establish a ] for this alteration ''']''' using the {{Tlx|Edit semi-protected}} template.<!-- Template:ESp --> ] (]) 18:07, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
== Ability to heal and repair itself ==
It looks like there is a sort of discussion in the article history, let's move it here. Should the first sentence in the lead end with "as well as the body's ability to heal and repair itself", or "as well as the body's '''claimed''' ability to heal and repair itself"? I think the first formulation is the most appropriate, since it is not controversial that that the human body has such an ability on a certain scope, for example simple cuts or flu. Osteopaths claim that this ability can 1) be affected by osteopathic practices of applying hand pressure to various parts of the body and 2) be extended to diseases that are considered incurable, such as Parkinson's Disease. These claims do not appear to have any scientific standing, but I don't see how the first formulation in any way implies that interpretation. ] ] 22:05, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
:It's not really right - and not sourced to an independent source. Something like the NHS would be better. ] <sup>]|]|]</sup> 07:17, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
:: I agree, I'll put it in the article. ] ] 13:16, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
:::I think the lede is pretty oversimplified compared to the descriptions of osteopathy that I've heard (I attended a lecture by a Canadian trained osteopath, similar to European training). I don't presently have a source in front of me so I'm not proposing a specific change, but noting that there was appreciation of the subtle complexities of health: fluid regulation including lymphatic and venous drainage as being key for longevity, the many small forces that milk the pituitary, the figure-8 motion present throughout the body during walking, including in the hip joint, between the two hips, and in the sacrum itself, and so forth. Also it struck me that they are incredibly interested in anatomical details and in learning embryology as a guide to adult anatomy and pathology. As embryology is getting cut from medical schools, the osteopaths may be the last to care about that.
:::This is what I consider oversimplified - because it sounds like the scope of a good massage therapist:
:::"Its practitioners claim that the wellbeing of an individual depends on their bones, muscles, ligaments and connective tissue functioning smoothly together. Osteopaths receive special training in the musculoskeletal system. They believe that their treatments, which primarily consist of moving, stretching and massaging a person’s muscles and joints...."--] (]) 03:47, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
::::], I'm probably the only the only sympathiser you'll find here and '''I suggest you discuss everything you want to do to the article here on this Talk Page and follow the advice given by others or else you will get blocked, banned or topic banned. There are some rules we follow here and until you get familiar with them, follow my advice!''' That sentence cites a reference in support and you can't remove it. You also have to cite sources for any sentence you want to add to this article.—] (]) 15:36, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
:::::If you want to complain about wikipedia's policies, please do what ] mentioned in the section above (and tell me also about it by contacting me).—] (]) 15:40, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 18:07, 12 December 2024

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to complementary and alternative medicine, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Osteopathy article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 3 months 
Good articlesOsteopathy was nominated as a Natural sciences good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (May 25, 2017). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.
This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconSkepticism Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconAlternative medicine
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Alternative medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative medicineTemplate:WikiProject Alternative medicineAlternative medicine
WikiProject iconAlternative views Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
The following Misplaced Pages contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors
This article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Since the external publication copied Misplaced Pages rather than the reverse, please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source:

Nomenclature

The sentence in the lead, "People practicing osteopathy are referred to as osteopathic practitioners" is inaccurate and contradicts two of the cited sources (the link to the third source appears to be dead). Non-physician, manipulation-only practitioners of osteopathy are referred to as osteopaths. Doctors of Osteopathic Medicine are referred to as osteopathic physicians. This is stated in the sources as well as the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine's website (http://www.aacom.org/become-a-doctor/about-om/US-vs-abroad). Both call themselves "DO's". In the United States, osteopaths are prohibited from referring to themselves as "DO's" to avoid being confused with osteopathic physicians.SympatheticResonance (talk)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Osteopathy/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 10:14, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

This article has way too paragraphs without citations and too many maintenance tags, so I have to quickfail it. Medical articles have higher standards than other articles. --FunkMonk (talk) 10:14, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Canada

it says it's not government regulated, then it says you need to register in private schools. If it's not regulated, you don't need any education, and could just teach yourself or make it up as you go... 64.110.254.75 (talk) 20:19, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Training requirements

Died of breast cancer, recently. And I learned she spent her time seeing an Osteopath, and the Article doesn't have prominently displayed something like REQUIRED EDUCATION. How much education does it take for some random quack to call himself "doctor"? A two-year degree? A course by mail from a matchbook cover? A certificate from some university in Belize? What's the difference in education between a medical doctor and this form of quack?2603:8081:3A00:30DF:FD49:B5B5:CF6D:BC59 (talk) 02:49, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Per WP:NOTAFORUM, I changed the section header, from "Quack Medicine and a Dead Friend". The issue of more content on education requirements is a reasonable one, so I wanted to leave that here. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:28, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
This is the wrong article. Here are the proper articles: Osteopathic medicine in the United States and Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 18:39, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
But I wonder whether it would be useful here to have anything more about the lack of training requirements? --Tryptofish (talk) 18:45, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
The "criticism" section deals with some of the problems. The issue is when certain methods are used for conditions where modern medicine is more appropriate. For example, OMT / HVLA manipulation is not an appropriate treatment for allergies and asthma. It may have some limited legitimacy for certain musculoskeletal complaints of a purely mechanical nature. Note that "limited"!! Modern DOs recognize this, and that's why very few of them continue to use OMT at all. They have learned of its limitations and the superior results from modern medicine. Some osteopaths still "over" depend on OMT, and we rightly call them quacks. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 00:43, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

False information on osteopathy

Please update with current information about American Osteopathic Medicine which is becoming quite widespread and mainstream in modern medicine. Most American osteopaths practice in primary care positions such as family and internal medicine directly alongside and in practices with allopaths equally. One in 4 medical school graduates are osteopathic physicians. Here is more information from the American osteopathic association. https://osteopathic.org/what-is-osteopathic-medicine/ Mjreillydo (talk) 19:01, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Already covered at Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:47, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

Regulation and legal status

Current article: New Zealand In New Zealand a course is offered at the Unitec Institute of Technology (Unitec). Australasian courses consist of a bachelor's degree in clinical science (osteopathy) followed by a master's degree. The Unitec double degree programme is the OCNZ prescribed qualification for registration in the scope of practice: Australian qualifications accredited by the Australian and New Zealand Osteopathic Council are also prescribed qualifications.

Correction: In New Zealand a course is offered at Ara Institute of Canterbury. The Bachelor of Musculoskeletal Health https://www.ara.ac.nz/products/programme/ch4063-stru-bachelor-of-musculoskeletal-health/) and the Postgraduate Diploma in Osteopathy (https://www.ara.ac.nz/products/programme/ch4064-stru-postgraduate-diploma-in-osteopathy/) programmes is the OCNZ prescribed qualification for registration in the scope of practice: Australian qualifications accredited by the Australian and New Zealand Osteopathic Council are also prescribed qualifications.

Osteopaths are health practitioners working under the Ministry of Health (https://www.health.govt.nz/regulation-legislation/health-practitioners/responsible-authorities). Osteopaths are Accident Compensation Corporation providers (https://www.acc.co.nz/im-injured/what-we-cover/treatment-we-pay-for). Osteopaths New Zealand (ONZ) https://osteopathsnz.co.nz/ represents osteopaths in New Zealand. ONZ is a member of Allied Health Aotearoa New Zealand (https://www.alliedhealth.org.nz/). JustineGu (talk) 19:34, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Does your proposed change really belong on this page, or at Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine? --Tryptofish (talk) 19:38, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
Good question. I would think the latter. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 22:52, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
When will the article be corrected please? JustineGu (talk) 05:08, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
You need to respond to the comments above. Have you looked at the other article? We have TWO very different articles on the topic of osteopathy. Are you in the right place? -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 15:16, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

This article is completely inaccurate and is misleading.

This page states that Osteopathy is a pseudoscience and is an alternative medicine, implying that there is not scientific credibility or validity in OMM as a treatment model. The citation that is used is the 4th citation from Quackwatch that when clicking on the link brings the user to a page that defines "quackery" and does not provide any scientific information proving that Osteopathy is a pseudoscience. This article then goes on to state, "An osteopathic physician in the United States is a physician trained in the full scope of medical practice, with a degree of Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine (DO)." It seems dubious to claim that OMM is a pseudoscience but then to acknowledge that Doctors of Osteopathic medicine have been conferred all of the rights, privileges, and responsibilities to that of a Doctor of Allopathy, MD. It defies all science and reason to believe that the manipulation of ones joints and muscles does not aid in the restoration of their normal function. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9143587/ 2601:80:C87E:A1C0:F4EB:8A77:8DFC:7A78 (talk) 17:12, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Doctor of osteopathic medicine is a different topic. They are pretty much normal doctors but with a bit of embarrassing quackery (i.e. osteopathy) mixed in with their training, largely for historical reasons. Meanwhile in many countries "osteopaths" (who anyone can be on their own say-so) are quintessential quacks at large. Bon courage (talk) 17:18, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Osteopaths aren’t self-identifying it’s a title. 82.152.216.54 (talk) 10:25, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 December 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Remove the word “pseudoscience / pseudoscientific” from the description of osteopathy as this is not accurate. In the UK osteopathy is an Allied Health Profession (not an alternative / complementary profession) based on a bio-psycho—social model of health and illness and is evidence based as outlined in its regulatory guidelines. All osteopaths have a masters level degree focused on diagnosing and treating musculoskeletal issues. Claims of pseudoscience are outdated. 82.152.216.54 (talk) 10:24, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. PianoDan (talk) 18:07, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Categories: